Pre-trib timeline

[Exit40]

Hi Mark. Thanks for the series of generally pleasant posts. So much to answer to, so I'll start with your last post and work backwards, as time permits, the points I believe to be the most pertinent.

I would say you are wrong on two accounts:

1. The tares are NOT "gathered," but collected! It is an entirely different word in the Greek. I would say some more word study is needed in your case.

2. The man who sows the seed is Jesus as He says in Mt 13:37, and as the field is this world, as Jesus says in v.38, then removal from this world is not Hades, but Heaven, and in v.43, the righteous shine in the Kingdom of the Father!

1. The word for gather/ed used in multiple verses in these parables is syllegō.

Outline of Biblical Usage
1) to gather up
2) to collect in order to carry off
Authorized Version (KJV) Translation Count — Total: 8
AV — gather 5, gather up 2, gather together 1

So 2) to collect is a definition of secondary usage, and in fact it is not used in that manner that I have been able to determine in a brief review of a previous word study. Which verse or verses are you using that use this aforementioned " entirely different word in the Greek " ?

2. You lost me completely with this statement... "then removal from this world is not Hades, but Heaven". I am in agreement with the rest.

So only if you want to be rigidly literal could you possibly deny the barn is not Heaven on the flimsiest of bases that the word: "Heaven" is not immediately equated with the barns' sanctuary in the parable. The Great Multitude, however, are delivered out of the Great Tribulation and wind up in the very presence of God the Father right inline with what I am saying. So not to over complicate things and keep it simple: it most certainly IS Heaven to where Jesus is building rooms for us as He said in John 14 and to where we can expect to go on the Day of the Lord! Halleluiah! We should encourage one another with these words!

I'm not trying to be rigid, but rather I am exploring the Word for the Truth of the matter. In the case of this parable what I perceive to be ' the barn ' is not Heaven per se, but the Kingdom of our Lord, the seat of which will be in Jerusalem, where His Throne will be. Does the Kingdom include the aspects of Heaven ? I am not certain, but I believe in a sense there will be a lot of Spiritual activity that reflects the aspects of Heaven. As we are to shine forth in the Kingdom of Our Father I don't believe I am making a presumption that it is not precisely Heaven, but in fact His Kingdom here on earth.

Regarding John 14, in particular verse 3, Our Lord goes to prepare a place, and when He comes again He receives us to Himself so we will be with Him. Well, He comes again and brings His Kingdom with Him so we will be with Him in his Kingdom, after his coming, and it will be here on earth. This does not preclude the dead in Christ from being with Him now, as they come along with Him at his return having been in the place He prepared, Our Fathers House with it's many mansions. And I believe also in the Spiritual aspect of His House, that being His Spirit indwelling us here on earth until we go to be with Him at His place, a more fully manifested and perfected dwelling place than the believers human heart.

God Bless You

David

[Exit40]

Hi Rt. Good post. I find myself somewhat in disagreement that the robes given and worn signify the resurrected bodies of the Saints. Certainly they are significant, but I believe in Heaven and the Kingdom to follow we will still need to be clothed, our glorified bodies covered if you will. As a reflection of the Heavenly tabernacle the earthly temple of the Jews was staffed by those trained to priesthood, and they wore robes to distinguish themselves. Also, I believe there were different types of robes worn so as to signify rank or position, all the way to the High Priest. So I believe also the robes worn in Heaven will signify rank and position, as given by the Lord, and for His purpose. While the robes are all white I believe there will be attachments, or accoutrements, that further qualify this order set up by Our Lord. We will have different rewards and work in the Kingdom, Saints adorned differently will display this, I believe.

The idea that this multitude stands before the throne with robes washed in the blood of the lamb shows that they are those who did not need to be given robes as did those souls under the altar, but that their robes were transformed while they still wore them. While believers live on the earth they are justified positionally before God, however their flesh is still corrupted and corruptible. Their earthly bodies will one day be completely made righteous by the blood of the lamb so that they could stand spotless and without wrinkle before the heavenly throne as high priests in the heavenly tabernacle. Their salvation will be complete at that point.

I dunno, RT, it seems we all must be given robes at some point, again to signify position, but I believe there is only one Resurrection of the dead. It matters not when we arrive in Heaven, the dead are all resurrected at the same time, receiving robes as they arrive, but all are glorified in Christ at the same time, and our robes then are changed to signify further our position before our Father and his High Priest. we still have work to do at this point I believe, and that work may actually be our reward.

Revelation 3:12
12 ‘He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.

Revelation 7:15
15 “For this reason, they are before the throne of God; and they serve Him day and night in His temple; and He who sits on the throne will spread His tabernacle over them.

These further my belief in order of Priesthood and Judges in the kingdom. Especially for the overcomers, who no longer have to go out. By suggestion this means then some will have to go out, but where and to do what I don't know. But I would speculate it might have something to do with furthering the purpose of the kingdom here on Earth during the Millennium.

For those who die before the rapture, they will be given robes of white, the heavenly raiment when they are resurrected, while those who are alive and raptured will have their robes cleansed and changed.

1 Corinthians 15:51-54
51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,
52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.
53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “Death is swallowed up in victory.

The raptured saints along with those who will be resurrected will accompany Christ at His return, but they will not necessarily leave the heavenly tabernacle to do so, and Christ will not necessarily leave His throne to return to earth, rather I believe that Christ arrives on His throne and that the heavens are opened so that those on earth can see Him and those who dwell there with Him as well.

Your statement about those raptured having their robes cleansed and changed has brought into mind something I have wondered about for a long time, and some of this stuff came from the new age church I attended for a while. They often spoke of aura's and those that could read them, who purportedly could tell us all about our lives and future even. While there many attempted to do this to me, but were so sorrily mistaken as to be laughable. One though, the high priest or whatever she was called, would only look at me askance, almost with an evil eye, and never spoke to me, but while reading others gave me several glances like that as I was nearby watching. I still don't understand that, other than there seemed to be an accompanying fear in her for what ever reason. The point is, Jesus read people like a book, telling them all about their lives. Others in the early Church had this ability also. So I have to wonder if we possibly do have readable auras that we might associate in some fashion to being a robe of sorts which reflects our earthly lives. At any rate, the subject of robes is a deep one, and probably deserves it's own study.

The throne of Christ, where He is seated is in the heavenly realm, but the earth is His footstool. Currently we are that footstool, the earthly temple that occupies the earth until we are gathered to Him. But one day Jerusalem on earth will have a physical temple rebuilt where Christ will have His footstool once again and where He will reign from, with His throne still residing in the heavenly place, except that then those on earth will see Him there.

Brings up the question, how far away will the Heavenly Throne be from the earth then. But this is getting into the Millennial kingdom, and maybe beyond so I think I will try stay with the events leading to the Second Advent for now.

God Bless You

David

[Exit40]

Hi Mark.

No, the ends of Heaven are already mentioned... the four four winds cover the cardinal points of the compass: i.e., everywhere on the earth.

That it's repeated twice is of no consequence beyond itself, other than sometimes a repeat with different wording is for emphasis, which in this case I have assumed it to be. Further research reveals the following, with wind being anemos....

Outline of Biblical Usage
1) wind, a violent agitation and stream of air
2) a very strong tempestuous wind
3) the four principal or cardinal winds, hence the four corners of heaven, wind being anemos....

And from Thayers.. I am unable to copy/paste from there as it is an image, so here is a brief quote leaving out the actual wind of the earth parts..

... hence the four corners of Heaven ( whense the Cardinal winds blow)

Thayers gives some verses for further understanding that imply the Spiritual or Heavenly aspect of these winds. Here is one...

Eze 37:9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.

So from here came my understanding, but further research reveals the mistake I made in overlooking. This is the angels gathering the elect at the sound of the Trumpet, the rapture following the resurrection, and in an accompanying part of the Gospel it is further defined as...

Mar 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.

So with my mistake apparent at this point, I would like to add the following. There is a Spiritual, or Heavenly aspect to these four winds, which I became preoccupied with, and I believe they must blow there before they can manifest on earth. These winds have Spiritual power, they come at the Lord's direction, and perform or carry His Will and whatever accompanies needed for that performance.

Regarding the Discourse and revealing of the gathering, I find there is no evidence directly presented there how long the Lord will be seen coming in the clouds before He actually arrives as lightening from the east to the west. We have to look elsewhere in Scripture to discover this time period, and at this point for me anyway, I just don't know. But it seems certain many events happen after seeing Him approaching and his actual arrival.

Running short on time here...

The Great Multitude, who show up in Heaven only after the sun/moon/star event of Mt 24:29 and the sixth Seal, are identified by no less an expert witness than an Elder who says they came out of the Great Tribulation! It is at that time that the Elect are delivered!

And as Paul says of the gathering of the Elect from the earth to Jesus on the clouds, just as Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse - the Elect who are still alive and are left UPON THE EARTH - will be caught up to join those resurrected (first) from the grave on the clouds.

As I just explained my belief about this I will point out again there doesn't seem to be any time reference that directly points out the timing of the resurrection/rapture. Except in Rev 7 the prior event is the sealing of the 144,000, which happens after the sixth seal events and Our Lord being seen sitting on His Throne, and many hiding from Him and the Wrath of the Lamb, which is apparently is come. So the Great Multitude before the throne being the apparent culmination of the Resurrection/rapture, His wrath is come, but not commenced with the opening of the seventh seal apparently being the beginning.

So in the context of the Olivet Discourse, it does not all happen in Heaven, but describes events from an earth-bound perspective.

A careful reading? Why that is most certainly needed indeed!

I have to ask, as much of your post seems directed at what appears to be you believing my take is this all happens in Heaven, where have you gotten this impression ? Obviously events happen here on earth, no one can flee Judea while in Heaven, there is no AoD in the Heavenly Tabernacle. Please explain your impression on this, as I don't believe I have stated such a thing. Perhaps a careful reading of my posts is what is needed.

God Bless you

David

[MarkT]

1. The word for gather/ed used in multiple verses in these parables is syllegō.

That would be incorrect.

Now, as a matter of conversing, it is not pleasant to be told you are wrong, but when I know you have committed an error, I am not jumping up and down on your chest when I correct you. Instead, it is a matter of love that I correct so as to allow you to grow in the Scripture.

There is a distinct word difference for the action of the collection of the tares versus the gathering up of the wheat which alludes to the Harvest allegory of Revelation 14 when Jesus is on the clouds and also pertains directly to the gathering up of the elect from the four winds in the Olivet Discourse.

Gathering versus Collected

Mt 24:31 …gathering the elect from the four winds…

The Rapture word used here is episunago: to gather together. This is akin to the parable of the wheat and tares where the wheat is gathered, sunago, and indeed is built up in the Greek from that word.

An outline of sunago in the Bible as presented by the Blue Letter Bible:

1) to gather together, to gather

a) to draw together, collect

1) of fishes
2) of a net in which they are caught

2) to bring together, assemble, collect

a) to join together, join in one (those previously separated)
b) to gather together by convoking
c) to be gathered i.e. come together, gather, meet

3) to lead with one's self

a) into one's home, i.e. to receive hospitably, to entertain

Rather than a simple gathering fish, not discounting that the Disciples were to be fishermen of men, the Rapture brings together a Great Multitude of people, an assemblage, joined together from every tribe, nation, language and people who meet in the Temple of God in Heaven before God the Father. Usages (2) and (3) apply.

Going from the gathering of the wheat, contrasts with the collection of the tares.

Mt 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.' "

syllego, which is used of the tares, while generally translated as ‘gather’ means, according to Thayer in his lexicon, in this instance specifically, to collect in order to carry off. The NIV gives a better translation of this passage than the King James which uses the same English word to convey two different Greek verbs.

συλλέγω [cf. σύν, II. fin,; Tdf. Proleg. p. 76]; fut. συλλέξω; 1 aor. συνέλέξα; pres. pass. 3 pers. sing. συλλέται; fr. Hom. down; Sept. chiefly for לקט; to gather up [cf. σύν II. 2]: τα ζιζάνια (for removal fr. the field), Mt. xiii. 28 sq. 30; pass. ib. 40; τι άπό with a gen. of the thing, Mt. vii. 16 [cf. W. § 58, 9 b. a.] ; τί έκ with a gen. of the place, to collect in order to carry off, Mt. xiii. 41; in order to keep, Lk. vi. 44; τί έίς τι, into a vessel, Mt. xiii. 48.*

The Blue Letter Bible outlines the usage of syllego in simple terms without the eschatological overtones found in sunago.

1) to gather up
2) to collect in order to carry off

[watching]

Hi Mark T,

I happened to notice the difference between "gathered" and "collected" myself, coincidentally, just before I saw your post, but if you will notice in Matthew 13:48, the good are "collected" and the bad are cast away.

13:48 ἣν ὅτε ἐπληρώθη ἀναβιβάσαντες ἐπὶ τὸν αἰγιαλὸν καὶ καθίσαντες συνέλεξαν τὰ καλὰ εἰς ἀγγεῖα, τὰ δὲ σαπρὰ ἔξω ἔβαλον

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=13&v=48&t=KJV#conc/48

Matthew 13:48-50

King James Version (KJV)

48Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.

49So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,

50And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

So, I'm not sure if the different uses of these words offers a clue or not.

If so, I can't seem to figure it out.

[MarkT]

.
My point is that the different use of collected versus gathered as determined by the underlying Greek shows that the tares are not treated the same as the wheat. People do confuse the two from time to time just like confusion exists on the two where one is taken and one is left. The one who is taken, paralambano, is the same verb used when one receives Christ and it is to receive an inheritance as was promised to Daniel.

While I note that sunago is a lot like the word used for the elect being gathered up in the Olivet Discourse, however, there are quite a few "rapture" verbs like that and I am not making a great deal that sunago is good and syllego is bad.

The parable of the fish does not pertain to the first resurrection in my opinion because as far as I can tell with the first resurrection, of which the Rapture is only a part, that only the righteous are taken up. There are four times in the Bible that it describes resurrections to Heaven. The first is only for the righteous; the second is for righteous and wicked. So which age is this parable? I'd say the Millennium.

Mt 13:47 "Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48 When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away. 49 This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Rev 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

The logic of the Greek in v.15 also allows for the corollary: those whose name was found written in the book of Life entered into the Kingdom of God.

The simple act of collecting is not the issue here; identifying the time for the actions being taken is important. If one is convinced this parable is the template for the end-times of the one 'seven,' then it sets you up for an earthly eternal existence and saying being 'taken' is bad. Paul taught the opposite; we, who are alive and are left (after the Great Tribulation) will exchange our sinful, mortal bodies for immortal and imperishable bodies and we will be lifted up to the clouds to be with Jesus. Being 'taken' is our hope.

[watching]

Hi Mark T,

I'm not sure about everything you said, in that, I'm not sure how it's all going to play out.

But I would agree with you that being "taken" is our hope.

Paralambanetai (παραλαμβάνεται) means to be received/accepted/to be taken alongside or with.

I don't see why the wicked would be "received" or "accepted."

Matthew 24:40

King James Version (KJV)

40Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken (received), and the other left.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=24&t=KJV#conc/40

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3880&t=KJV

http://concordances.org/greek/3880.htm


At least that's how I'm understanding it, anyway.

[mark s]

Hi Mark T,

I happened to notice the difference between "gathered" and "collected" myself, coincidentally, just before I saw your post, but if you will notice in Matthew 13:48, the good are "collected" and the bad are cast away.

13:48 ἣν ὅτε ἐπληρώθη ἀναβιβάσαντες ἐπὶ τὸν αἰγιαλὸν καὶ καθίσαντες συνέλεξαν τὰ καλὰ εἰς ἀγγεῖα, τὰ δὲ σαπρὰ ἔξω ἔβαλον

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=13&v=48&t=KJV#conc/48

Matthew 13:48-50

King James Version (KJV)

48Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.

49So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,

50And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

So, I'm not sure if the different uses of these words offers a clue or not.

If so, I can't seem to figure it out.

Hi watching,

I looked at this too. First I saw that sullego was in fact used several times in the parables, just like David said. And I noticed the same thing as what I think you are saying, that it is used of gathering both "good" and "bad".

G4816
συλλέγω
sullegō
Total KJV Occurrences: 9
Mat 7:16, Mat 13:28-30 (3), Mat 13:41, Luk 6:44, Mat 13:40, Mat 13:48, Mat 13:30

And then there is the matter of correct interpretation of the particular genre, specifically, parables. Not every last little detail within parables is meant to convey some specific theological doctrine. Many people read way to much into some of these parables, trying to prove their particular theory out of parables.

The fact is, a parable is a story intended to teach a truth that corresponds to the theme of the parable. They should not be read the same as, for instance, one of Paul's passages of complex doctrinal exposition.

A simple example I think everyone can recognize is the "parable of the unjust judge". I think we can all see that Jesus is comparing our heavenly Father to this unjust judge, but I think we can also all see that Jesus is not intending to express that our heavenly Father is unjust.

This parable of the wheat and the tares, for instance. Everyone understood the harvest of the grain, and that the good were kept, and the bad not. The timing is simple, Jesus said. The end of the age. There will be a separation made.

Personally, I don't see that these parables give more detail than the already detailed actual prophecies given elsewhere.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[MarkT]

I never considered that Jesus was saying God was the unjust Judge of Luke 18, but that we should continue to petition the Lord in prayer (Php 4:6) even though He is seems slow in rendering justice (2Pe 3:9). Isn't that the lament the martyrs proclaim when the fifth Seal is broken? (Rev 6:10) Like a bunch of children on a long car ride, all we want to know is 'how long?' We have a problem with delayed results. But God's Wisdom is greater than ours. He delays so that we can come to Him and not be destroyed (Isa 48:9).

Now I did a study of the "four winds of heaven" concentrating on the words 'wind' and 'heaven' in both the Hebrew and the Greek to answer David's (Exit40) take that Mt 24:31 is ethereal and not physical. The interesting part is that the concept in both languages, partly because they are shared by the same culture at the same time, is that 'heaven' is dual in definition being both physical in what is above, i.e., the sky, and what is lofty: the unseen abode of God.

For over a decade now I thought that Jesus' Words, echoing what is written in Isaiah 13:5 were dual - that the four winds covered the compass points of the earth meaning that the gathering includes all directions, or everything, but that the ends of Heaven were from the spiritual world of the afterlife - which reflected the resurrection of the Dead in Christ from Paradise.

Now after studying it, I see that the phrase "end of the heavens" is just as physical as the compass points of the four winds. This is just how the phrase is used in Dt 4:32 meaning to cover all the earth, and in Psalm 19:6 - which mimics how I think Jesus will gather the Elect on the Day of the Lord in Mt 24:31 / Mk 13:27 - coming like lightning (quickly) lapping the earth from east to west (In its direction of rotation like the sun) and that this gathering of those who are still alive and are left has a point where it starts, and after a "victory lap," so to speak, is finished.

I thought for years that this was the one instance that Jesus got the sequence of events wrong, listing the Rapture of living Saints before the Resurrection of deceased Saints. Now, there is no incongruity in the sequence Jesus lays out in the Olivet Discourse at this final event. I think now that He is speaking only about the few remaining Elect who never die, but are taken up from the earth to meet Him in the air.

A lesson here for me is that we often get set in our beliefs of what a passage means and how often do we critically examine it? How true am I to what the Word actually says? Or, do I "think" I know what it says? And how often has my thinking led me astray? You know, when we post our thoughts, opinions, and beliefs here, I think we're teaching when we share. I do not mean my words to be heard as instruction down from on high - far be it! However, when I share my perceptions on the Bible and I compare what it says to another thought expressed; I am attempting to do with the reader what I try to do with myself: stay true to the Word. In all this, I am reminded of a couple of self-help books (Telling Yourself the Truth) and a general saying: "Don't believe everything you think."

In all this, I come to these boards to sharpen and to be sharpened. I don't always like to be sharpened, the stone is kind of rough and my ego is a sensitive, fragile thing at times... LOL. However, I have managed to make material changes in my eschatology in how I read the Bible a few times from posting and receiving criticisms from other like-minded individuals. David's point, while still not accepted by me, has nevertheless caused me to change my idea about what the Bible says. And as my goal is to present the Bible faithfully, I will change what I share about Mt 24:31 because in doing so, I may be teaching someone who is just coming to an understanding of this passage... and God desires the teacher to teach the truth - especially about Him! That's quite a responsibility on any of us that "instruct" upon God's Word - giving meaning and application to its passages.

[watching]

Hi mark s,

Interesting point!

However, I think in the case of the unjust judge, Jesus is comparing our heavenly Father to him, in that, although the unjust judge will avenge the widow, simply because she was annoying him, Jesus is saying HOW MUCH MORE, will our heavenly Father, in due time, avenge those who are crying out to him day and night.

Sort of along the same lines as the following parable, as well.

Matthew 7:7-11

King James Version (KJV)

7Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

8For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

9Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?

10Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?

11If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

Also, in the case of the wheat and the tares, versus the parable about the net, I wanted to point out that it could be that the Lord was using the example that would make the most sense depending on the situation.

For instance, when one is gathering wheat, it probably would be easier to pick out the tares first, because they would be fewer in number and be more prominent and easier to spot. Since, from my understanding, the tares actually stand upright, whereas the wheat bows when it is ripe.

However, in the case of the net, although some translations specify "fish," from what I noticed in the Greek, it does not specify fish. So when the net is pulled in, it apparently gathers all types of sea creatures or other objects. Therefore, it is probably easier to spot out the healthy fish that are flopping around among whatever else might have been caught, and then just throw the other stuff back in the water.

So, I think that it could be that Jesus was just giving the examples that would make the most sense, based on the various situations.

Then again, in the case of the sheep and goats, there is apparently an equal number, so in that case it would be easier to just divide the two groups rather that to pick one group out from the other. Sort of like when you are dividing checker pieces. Since they are about equal in number, you don't necessarily pick out the red first, or pick out the black from the red, you just separate them out.

So, it could be that all these various examples are given, in order to purposely be ambiguous as to what happens when, because it may be that we are not to know the exact sequence, or how everything will play out exactly.

Or, then again, it could be that ALL of the above scenarios will be true at some point or another. I'm really not sure.

I also wanted to mention that I was thinking about my post last night concerning the word "paralambano," and I think that, again, it is hard to say whether this word is being used to mean "taken" in a good sense or a bad sense.

Although, I lean towards it meaning "taken" in a good sense. I really cannot be 100% sure of that.

So, maybe, once again, it could be that it was meant to be ambiguous. I'm really not sure.

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Mark's account shows that the gathering involves both those on earth and in heaven, if the "four winds" only indicates locations on earth then why is heaven mentioned here as an additional place?

Mark 13:24-27
24 “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light,
25 and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens will be shaken.
26 “Then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.
27 “And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven.

The gathering involves those from the farthest reaches in every direction wherever they might be on earth and also in heaven. So therefore it involves both those alive on earth and also those who dwell in the heavenly realm. Also none of these passages indicate that these individuals are gathered to heaven, if you read the accounts in the OT that indirectly speak of this gathering,it would appear that it is to Jerusalem that they are gathered.
RT

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Hi Rt. Good post. I find myself somewhat in disagreement that the robes given and worn signify the resurrected bodies of the Saints. Certainly they are significant, but I believe in Heaven and the Kingdom to follow we will still need to be clothed, our glorified bodies covered if you will. As a reflection of the Heavenly tabernacle the earthly temple of the Jews was staffed by those trained to priesthood, and they wore robes to distinguish themselves. Also, I believe there were different types of robes worn so as to signify rank or position, all the way to the High Priest. So I believe also the robes worn in Heaven will signify rank and position, as given by the Lord, and for His purpose. While the robes are all white I believe there will be attachments, or accoutrements, that further qualify this order set up by Our Lord. We will have different rewards and work in the Kingdom, Saints adorned differently will display this, I believe.

I dunno, RT, it seems we all must be given robes at some point, again to signify position, but I believe there is only one Resurrection of the dead. It matters not when we arrive in Heaven, the dead are all resurrected at the same time, receiving robes as they arrive, but all are glorified in Christ at the same time, and our robes then are changed to signify further our position before our Father and his High Priest. we still have work to do at this point I believe, and that work may actually be our reward.

Hello David (I have been praying for you, hope things are improving)

First of all let me say that I do believe that we will have some kind of garment, both angels and the Lord at His transfiguration appear to the observer to be wearing some kind of garment, and the heavenly bride is described as wearing fine white linen, so yes I do believe that we will be clothed in some kind of actual garment that acts as our priestly raiment. However I also believe that this white robe which is actually "light" or "glory" that the 5th seal martyrs are given after their death represents their new glorified body. The term "white" in the Greek means:

white
Strong's Greek #3022
3022 λευκός [leukos /lyoo·kos/] adj. From luke (“light”); TDNT 4:241; TDNTA 530; GK 3328; 25 occurrences; AV translates as “white” 25 times. 1 light, bright, brilliant. 1a brilliant from whiteness, (dazzling) white. 1a1 of the garments of angels, and of those exalted to the splendour of the heavenly state. 1a2 shining or white garments worn on festive or state occasions. 1a3 of white garments as the sign of innocence and purity of the soul. 1b dead white. 1b1 of the whitening colour of ripening grain.

It is not an insignificant detail that these fifth seal martyrs who are described as "souls" being the disembodied spirits of the dead, who have no physical body at this point are given white robes of "light", they are glorified. This is not just a simple garment, they are clothed with the glory of the Lord, something they did not have a souls of the dead, yes they may also receive an actual garment as well, but this is more than that. So they are souls who receive a glorified robe, you do not have to have a doctorate in biblical studies to realize that this represents their resurrection. To me at least this is fairly obvious. They are the dead who are resurrected and then told to wait until their number is completed.
-Why do they have to wait? Because their number needs to be completed.
-What are they "waiting" for? For God to avenge their blood in the judgment of those who dwell on the earth.
-Who are they that will complete their number? They are what we would call the tribulation saints.

Something significant is happening, these souls of the dead saints who died as martyrs on the earth are undergoing some event that denotes a change in their position, the giving of this white robe, changes their position. After this change takes place they are told to wait a bit longer for their number to be completed. Now in my NAS version it says this:

Revelation 6:11
11 And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a little while longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, would be completed also.

The italicized words do not appear in the original manuscript, so the passage actually does not imply that the number is completed, but rather that they who will die as martyrs after them will be made complete also, just as the fifth seal martyrs were completed. They will be completed as in fully finished or perfected.

Also the idea that there is only one resurrection is false, I have covered this already in my discussion here with Seeker. Christ has already been resurrected, so he was the first and His own words demonstrate the contrary is true.

1 Corinthians 15:22-26
22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming,
24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.

All die, and all are resurrected, however there is an order to how they appear before the heavenly throne. I am not going to rehash all this again here, please feel free to go back a page or two and read my discussion with Seeker on this point. But I will say this even the Revelation shows that there is more than one resurrection:

Revelation 20:4-6
4 Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

Many, I believe, wrongly assume that the second resurrection actually dictates that there are only two in number, while I believe that it denotes two kinds or types of resurrection- which is supported by scripture- one to life and one to Judgment and condemnation. It just so happens that those who are raised to judgment are also the last in the order, but that does not mean that there won't be righteous raised along with them. Again please go back and read my previous posts. I find it interesting that the passage above says that they are blessed who have a "part" in the first resurrection, maybe meaning that they are part of a whole,It doesn't say blessed are they who are resurrected first, but blessed are they who are part of those who will experience this kind of resurrection. Perhaps this is evidence that these resurrected here in Revelation 20 are only a portion of those who take part in this kind of resurrection, that to eternal life. The first in rank, and yes the first as in before the resurrection to Judgment. But that does not mean that there is only one of this kind of resurrection.

Revelation 3:12
12 ‘He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.

Revelation 7:15
15 “For this reason, they are before the throne of God; and they serve Him day and night in His temple; and He who sits on the throne will spread His tabernacle over them.

These further my belief in order of Priesthood and Judges in the kingdom. Especially for the overcomers, who no longer have to go out. By suggestion this means then some will have to go out, but where and to do what I don't know. But I would speculate it might have something to do with furthering the purpose of the kingdom here on Earth during the Millennium.

I do not believe this is suggestive at all, but definitive, they will no longer go out, it does not suggest at all that there are those who will have to go out.

The raptured saints along with those who will be resurrected will accompany Christ at His return, but they will not necessarily leave the heavenly tabernacle to do so, and Christ will not necessarily leave His throne to return to earth, rather I believe that Christ arrives on His throne and that the heavens are opened so that those on earth can see Him and those who dwell there with Him as well.

Your statement about those raptured having their robes cleansed and changed has brought into mind something I have wondered about for a long time, and some of this stuff came from the new age church I attended for a while. They often spoke of aura's and those that could read them, who purportedly could tell us all about our lives and future even. While there many attempted to do this to me, but were so sorrily mistaken as to be laughable. One though, the high priest or whatever she was called, would only look at me askance, almost with an evil eye, and never spoke to me, but while reading others gave me several glances like that as I was nearby watching. I still don't understand that, other than there seemed to be an accompanying fear in her for what ever reason. The point is, Jesus read people like a book, telling them all about their lives. Others in the early Church had this ability also. So I have to wonder if we possibly do have readable auras that we might associate in some fashion to being a robe of sorts which reflects our earthly lives. At any rate, the subject of robes is a deep one, and probably deserves it's own study.

While this is an interesting idea, I do not believe that the "robe" that the fifth seal martyrs receive has anything to do with "aura's", only in the sense that they are shining in glory. Though it may be true that we as believers possess something that the forces of evil can discern- personally I think it's the Holy Spirit. One must stick to the scriptures themselves when interpreting, we cannot take the ideas of men and use them as tools of interpretation.

Scripture tells us that we will be changed, how are we changed? We will put on the imperishable body of immortality.

1 Corinthians 15:51-54
51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,
52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.
53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “Death is swallowed up in victory.

We will one day be clothed with our dwelling from heaven, we desire to be clothed with immortality.

2 Corinthians 5:1-8
1 For we know that if the earthly tent which is our house is torn down, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 For indeed in this house we groan, longing to be clothed with our dwelling from heaven,
3 inasmuch as we, having put it on, will not be found naked.
4 For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened, because we do not want to be unclothed but to be clothed, so that what is mortal will be swallowed up by life.
5 Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.

RT

[mark s]

I've seen the same thing about the "four winds of heaven". Mark, I've done the same word study, and it's very interesting indeed!

I've reached the same conclusion, that this is talking about the ends of the earth.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[Exit40]

Hi watching. I'd like to address the following...

Also, in the case of the wheat and the tares, versus the parable about the net, I wanted to point out that it could be that the Lord was using the example that would make the most sense depending on the situation.

For instance, when one is gathering wheat, it probably would be easier to pick out the tares first, because they would be fewer in number and be more prominent and easier to spot. Since, from my understanding, the tares actually stand upright, whereas the wheat bows when it is ripe.

The parable actually states the tares are gathered first, but the wheat is gathered into the barn. So it seems your analogy is correct. It would be easy for the reapers to pick the tares out to separate, syllegō, but at the same time gather the wheat, synagō, into the barn. Reapers would likely go row to row accomplishing a two task function with the ulitimate goal of separation of the two made easier by multi tasking if you will, or having reapers with one of the either two functions. Also notable is the wheat bows probably under the weight of the grain, and the Spiritual significance of the wheat bowing before the reapers is a wonderful thought.

Our Lord's explanation of this parable is the harvest is at the end of the world, vs 39& 40. In verse 41 a further explanation is at this harvest time all things that offend and those who work iniquity are gathered out of His Kingdom, which is apparently here on earth at this time, and cast them into the furnace of fire. This narrative suggests to me this is the end of the age of man and the Millenial kingdom has arrived, with the furnace of fire being hades, the place once being near to Shoel but separated by the chasm, where they are held for the final Judgement.

However, in the case of the net, although some translations specify "fish," from what I noticed in the Greek, it does not specify fish. So when the net is pulled in, it apparently gathers all types of sea creatures or other objects. Therefore, it is probably easier to spot out the healthy fish that are flopping around among whatever else might have been caught, and then just throw the other stuff back in the water.

I agree it is not fish gathered , synagō in this case, but merely states it gathered of every kind. The word for kind is genos which is defined as....

1) kindred
a) offspring
b) family
c) stock, tribe, nation
1) i.e. nationality or descent from a particular people
d) the aggregate of many individuals of the same nature, kind, sort

In the context of this parable, I prefer the final definition as it resembles the various natures of humanity as a whole, and easy to separate by different types. Once again the parable is about the kingdom of Heaven, apparently here on earth at this time. With the net full and drawn to shore an undefined 'they' gather, syllegō, the good, who are defined as the good in the next verse, 49, into vessels, and the bad, defined in vs 49 as the wicked, are cast away, or out, and not necessarily back into the sea. These cast out, are now outside the Kingdom. The Kingdom now here, at the end of this world or age, the angels sever the wicked from the just, and those separated out go to the furnace of fire, or as I believe Hades, to await final Judgement. And the good, or just, are left in the Kingdom not having to go anywhere except possibly to be carried away in the vessels they were gathered into.

So, I think that it could be that Jesus was just giving the examples that would make the most sense, based on the various situations.

Then again, in the case of the sheep and goats, there is apparently an equal number, so in that case it would be easier to just divide the two groups rather that to pick one group out from the other. Sort of like when you are dividing checker pieces. Since they are about equal in number, you don't necessarily pick out the red first, or pick out the black from the red, you just separate them out.

So, it could be that all these various examples are given, in order to purposely be ambiguous as to what happens when, because it may be that we are not to know the exact sequence, or how everything will play out exactly.

Or, then again, it could be that ALL of the above scenarios will be true at some point or another. I'm really not sure.

I also wanted to mention that I was thinking about my post last night concerning the word "paralambano," and I think that, again, it is hard to say whether this word is being used to mean "taken" in a good sense or a bad sense.

Although, I lean towards it meaning "taken" in a good sense. I really cannot be 100% sure of that.

So, maybe, once again, it could be that it was meant to be ambiguous. I'm really not sure.

These parables have two apparent things in common. One, the harvest at the end of the world/age, and two, there are two different gatherings of different types, those bound for Judgement, and those bound for the Kingdom. Revelation 14: 14-18 describes two reapers, one appearing as the Son of Man siting on a cloud who reaps as the harvest of the earth is ripe. The other is an angel who does not reap, but thrusts in his sickle to 'gather' the clusters of he vine of the earth, these are headed for the winepress. At this point I am not sure where to go and would ask you all to contribute to the potentials of this, other than what appears obvious, the Kingdom is here and the prophecies in the parables are being fulfilled.

God Bless You

David

David

[Resurrection Torchlight]

The parable actually states the tares are gathered first, but the wheat is gathered into the barn. So it seems your analogy is correct. It would be easy for the reapers to pick the tares out to separate, syllegō, but at the same time gather the wheat, synagō, into the barn. Reapers would likely go row to row accomplishing a two task function with the ulitimate goal of separation of the two made easier by multi tasking if you will, or having reapers with one of the either two functions. Also notable is the wheat bows probably under the weight of the grain, and the Spiritual significance of the wheat bowing before the reapers is a wonderful thought.

Our Lord's explanation of this parable is the harvest is at the end of the world, vs 39& 40. In verse 41 a further explanation is at this harvest time all things that offend and those who work iniquity are gathered out of His Kingdom, which is apparently here on earth at this time, and cast them into the furnace of fire. This narrative suggests to me this is the end of the age of man and the Millenial kingdom has arrived, with the furnace of fire being hades, the place once being near to Shoel but separated by the chasm, where they are held for the final Judgement.

Please don't think I am coming at this with an attitude of criticism, but rather just as a matter of honesty in what I see. Those of you discussing the parable of the tares are so busy defining the meaning of words that it appears to me that you might be missing the whole point. As most of you have articulated so well, there are two words used- a gathering and a collecting. And as most of you have so adeptly pointed out the parable deals in terms of the wheat harvest. What I see lacking is a connecting of the two- David here has done this well I think. The point of the parable is that the tares or weeds were allowed to grow among the wheat until the harvest, because to collect the weeds before harvest may jeopardize some of the crop. In pulling up the weeds some of the wheat might also be uprooted. Think about the significance of this idea, the tares are the wicked sown among the wheat who represent the sons of the kingdom. It astounds me that the Lord for our sakes leaves the wicked among us, so that we not be uprooted prematurely. The pulling up of the tares is a kind of reaping; reaping represents the cutting off of life, the point the parable makes is that there will come a time when this earth will yield its crop in full.

The parable clearly states that the tares are collected first- and bound up and burned- collected in order to be carried off,rather than gathered together and brought into the Lord's barn. It is clear from the explanation of the parable that this collection of the tares is the resurrection of the wicked to judgment.

Matthew 13:40-43
40 “So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age.
41 “The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness,
42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
43 “Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

These are those who are raised to judgment are then cast into the lake of fire. THEN the wheat is gathered into the Lord's barn. The Lord's barn on earth was the temple, therefore the gathering together of the wheat is also a resurrection event- the in-gathering of the wheat harvest of souls. There is only one place where a resurrection to judgment occurs and that is AFTER the millennial reign. Since we know that the tares are collected first then this resurrection event or gathering of the wheat must follow the gathering of the stumbling blocks out of the kingdom, they are gathered out, and the wheat is gathered in. This is in an of itself very interesting, where is the kingdom when this happens? If stumbling blocks are gathered out of the kingdom, they must first be in it, and if wheat is gathered in then they must somehow be outside of it. However it is not the kingdom per-say that the wheat is gathered into, rather they are gathered into the Lord's barn, the explanation given is that then they will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father, they will be glorified- resurrected to receive their glorified bodies, and joined together with those who were raised to life and given their eternal glorified body as well. The kingdom is wherever Christ and/or His body resides whether they are alive as mortals on earth, dead or resurrected. The parable would indicate that the kingdom is on the earth in the midst of the field of wheat that is growing and maturing. But His kingdom is not only of this earth but also where the seat of His throne resides in heaven until this heaven and earth are destroyed and he creates a new heaven and earth, all those who will have been raised to life will inherit it.

You must understand this in terms of the wheat harvest. This gathering into the Lords barn reflects the Feast of Tabernacles which was also called the Feast of the In-gathering it was the final feast of the year and occurred after the general wheat harvest. I have explained this before but will repeat it again for the sake of those following this thread, there are three feasts that Israel was commanded to keep all related to specific harvests, the first was the feast of unleavened bread, during this feast the first fruits of the barley harvest were brought into the temple and offered as a wave offering, on this day the Lord was resurrected (as the first fruit of the dead). His resurrection is associated with this harvest- the Barley first fruits offering. This day began the count of the omer, each day was counted until seven Sabbaths had been completed 49 days in all. During this time the barley crop was harvested and gathered into the storehouse, most of the barley would have been harvested by Pentecost, though there was some overlap. By the end of the omer count the first fruits of the wheat harvest were ready to be harvested and on the 50th day (always a SUnday by the way)brought into the temple and baked into two loaves of bread and again offered as a wave offering before the Lord. The rest of the wheat crop would be harvested at the end of summer, with the final threshing occurring just before the feast of Tabernacles.

These feasts IMO represent the three resurrection events that Christ speaks of when He talks concerning the order of the resurrection. The barley first fruits, the wheat first fruits and the general wheat harvest. The barley first fruits represent those of this present age- the church also known as the body of Christ (Christ first fruits), followed by the wheat first fruits- those who are saved during the tribulation and resurrected afterward (those who are Christ's at His coming) and finally those who are gathered in at the end of the millennium (then comes the end). The parable in Matthew 13 speaks to the final group, those sons of the kingdom who are resurrected to life after the millennium is completed. To me this is the only scenario that explains the tares being collected and burned first before the wheat is gathered in. It does not contradict scripture in any way whatsoever. The feasts were given as a shadow of what was to come, the people were commanded to appear in Jerusalem for each of these feasts. They are a picture of the in-gathering of each of the Lord's harvests into His heavenly Tabernacle.(The Lord's barn).

A few interesting things I discovered in my research. The barley that was grown during Christ's day was very plentiful, it was the most common and least expensive grain. It grew easily and withstood the extreme temperatures and was flood and drought resistant. It was also much easier than wheat to separate from its chaff, it required beating or flailing and winnowing.

Wheat on the other hand was more difficult to grow, much more sensitive to climate conditions and therefore more expensive to trade. It also required the use of a tribulum, to separate the grain from the chaff, a farm implement that looked like a sled and would have sharp stones or metal embedded in it's underside which would be pulled over the grain by an animal, often with a rider or two upon it.

I personally see the two grains represented by the harvest feasts of Israel as representative of dispensations, though I am uncertain. The barley which more easily separates from the chaff represents those who are in Christ- the church. While the wheat which must undergo tribulation to be separated from the chaff representing both the firstfruits of the wheat harvest those who ripen during the tribulation and those of the general wheat harvest to follow during the millennium.

Malachi 4:1
1 “For behold, the day is coming, burning like a furnace; and all the arrogant and every evildoer will be chaff; and the day that is coming will set them ablaze,” says the Lord of hosts, “so that it will leave them neither root nor branch.”

Luke 3:17
17 “His winnowing fork is in His hand to thoroughly clear His threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into His barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

Now here is one last tidbit for those who may be unaware- "His threshing floor" is the temple mount. The temple was built directly upon the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite. The angel of the Lord stood over Jerusalem to destroy it at this place because David wrongly set out to number the people. Later Solomon built the temple on that very site.

1 Chronicles 21:18
18 Then the angel of the Lord commanded Gad to say to David, that David should go up and build an altar to the Lord on the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.

2 Chronicles 3:1
1 Then Solomon began to build the house of the Lord in Jerusalem on Mount Moriah, where the Lord had appeared to his father David, at the place that David had prepared on the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.

RT

[MarkT]

RT:

Are the tares really uprooted, or reaped first?

I mean, in the context of the parable, if weeding out the tares by pulling them up would harm the wheat, wouldn't reaping them which does the same thing still harm the wheat when it is ready at the harvest?

Secondly, the tares, which are collected, or bundled, or in a spiritual sense, bound; are not burned at that time but will be burned - a future event.

This parable set forth as such where the wheat is harvested first and then the collected tares are burned in this world follows a Pre-Wrath reading of the sixth Seal deliverance of the Great Multitude to (the barn of) Heaven which is closely followed by the Day of the Lord first Trumpet's fire and blood - supplying two of the three elements said to go forth with God's Wrath on that Day in OT prophecy.

This parable as set in my interpretation also follows the pattern set in Rev ch 14 where the Harvest comes first and then an avenging Angel sets out to provide the blood. Lastly in God's Wrath come the Bowl Judgments.

The parable of the wheat and tares thus supports a Rapture-then-Wrath eschatology.

The parable of the fish reflects a later time (after the Millennium) when the wicked dead are resurrected and have their Judgment Day.

[Exit40]

Hi RT. Bless you for being so patient. I think I am beginning to understand what you are saying about three resurrections, although to believe in this manner I have a lot of undoing to do, if that is possible. Yes, there has been a lot of banter about the meanings of words, some of it needless. As for the word syllegō meaning collecting, the only version I have seen it interpreted that way in is the NIV. Every other version considers that interpretation to be secondary. So I consider it to be a moot point, with nothing more to say about it on my part.

Thanks for the explanations of the feasts and harvests. I would like to explore these more, and have promised myself I would someday... Guess I better get on it so I can keep up with you. Briefly now, as everyone is getting home at the same time here, I am particularly interested in the count of the omer, as it appears to have some relevance to the counting of the Jubilee cycles. There is much confusion about this as over time the count has apparently been lost, but the notable year is the fiftieth, which some believe also counted as the first year of the next cycle. Do you see anything of relevance here you could relay to us about this ?

Gotta run. Good post.

God Bless You

David

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Are the tares really uprooted, or reaped first?

I mean, in the context of the parable, if weeding out the tares by pulling them up would harm the wheat, wouldn't reaping them which does the same thing still harm the wheat when it is ready at the harvest?

Secondly, the tares, which are collected, or bundled, or in a spiritual sense, bound; are not burned at that time but will be burned - a future event.

This parable set forth as such where the wheat is harvested first and then the collected tares are burned in this world follows a Pre-Wrath reading of the sixth Seal deliverance of the Great Multitude to (the barn of) Heaven which is closely followed by the Day of the Lord first Trumpet's fire and blood - supplying two of the three elements said to go forth with God's Wrath on that Day in OT prophecy.

This parable as set in my interpretation also follows the pattern set in Rev ch 14 where the Harvest comes first and then an avenging Angel sets out to provide the blood. Lastly in God's Wrath come the Bowl Judgments.

The parable of the wheat and tares thus supports a Rapture-then-Wrath eschatology.

The parable of the fish reflects a later time (after the Millennium) when the wicked dead are resurrected and have their Judgment Day.

Hi Mark

I don't think I said that the tares are reaped first, the parable would seem to indicate that the tares and wheat are reaped together. Again the reaping of the plant is the cutting off of life or the death of the people, so both tares and wheat are reaped at the same time.Righteous and wicked die at the same time. I believe that this might only mean that natural death comes for them equally, tares and wheat live and die together as they occupy the earth. It may also be that there is some event that brings the harvest to an end that cuts off both the tares and wheat simultaneously.

It is the collection of the tares that happens first, then the righteous are gathered in. This happens after reaping. The parable uses agricultural terms, I am not 100% positive but I do not think that bundled weeds would have served any purpose and thus it is unlikely that people hearing this parable would have thought that the burning of them would not immediately follow their being collected. The explanation in verse 40 seems to express this as well:

Matthew 13:39-42
39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels.
40 “So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age.
41 “The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness,
42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

It is the end of the age when this collection and gathering event occurs, it is a harvest taking place, a harvest of souls that is coming to an end. I can think of only one event described in scripture that would qualify for this final reaping on a grand scale and that would be the events that lead up to and include the final judgment:

Revelation 20:9
9 And they came up on the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down from heaven and devoured them.

The wicked who are deceived who go to war with those saints encamped at Jerusalem are burned up- this is the final reaping of the tares it may be that this same fire that destroys the wicked is the same thing that "reaps" the souls of the righteous though we are not told the fate of those saints so I cannot be certain of it. However we are told that the earth and heavens flee, other scriptures describe the earth being burned up. The mechanics of this reaping are not revealed to us precisely. The angels gather them together before the judgment seat where they are separated (sheep from goats)and the tares are cast into the lake of fire, while the wheat is gathered into the Lord's barn, they inherit the new heavens and new earth along with those earlier harvests who will have entered into the Lord's barn before them.

Revelation 14 only speaks of a reaping event, the cutting off of life, though the grapes are said to be gathered in the wine press, but here the wine press represents Jerusalem, this represents those who die at the final battle when Christ returns. In fact there are two reapers one who is described as the Son of Man wearing a golden crown who gathers the grain. Throughout scripture this description is ascribed to Christ Himself, the other is said to be the angel that comes from the heavenly temple he reaps the clusters of the vine. The parable in Matt 13, is pretty clear that those doing the gathering are all angels while here in Revelation the son of man is reaping the harvest of grain there is no mention in Revelation 14 of an ingathering . Now Also in Rev. 14 you have the 144,000 who are said to be the first fruits purchased from among men. This harvest described in this passage fits perfectly with Pentecost, they are wheat first fruits. The wheat first fruits used for the wave offering in the latter temple era was grown in a specially dedicated field and reaped by the high priest of the temple with a special sickle dedicated just for this purpose, this parallels Christ reaping the grain in Rev. 14- He is the great High priest harvesting the first fruits, while the general harvest that followed was reaped by the people. In addition the first ripening grapes ripened in time for Pentecost and would have been brought to the temple for the celebration of first fruits or Pentecost and would have been the first to be pressed into new wine.


RT

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Hi RT. Bless you for being so patient. I think I am beginning to understand what you are saying about three resurrections, although to believe in this manner I have a lot of undoing to do, if that is possible. Yes, there has been a lot of banter about the meanings of words, some of it needless. As for the word syllegō meaning collecting, the only version I have seen it interpreted that way in is the NIV. Every other version considers that interpretation to be secondary. So I consider it to be a moot point, with nothing more to say about it on my part.

Thanks for the explanations of the feasts and harvests. I would like to explore these more, and have promised myself I would someday... Guess I better get on it so I can keep up with you. Briefly now, as everyone is getting home at the same time here, I am particularly interested in the count of the omer, as it appears to have some relevance to the counting of the Jubilee cycles. There is much confusion about this as over time the count has apparently been lost, but the notable year is the fiftieth, which some believe also counted as the first year of the next cycle. Do you see anything of relevance here you could relay to us about this ?

Gotta run. Good post.

I don't want you to think I am unwilling to reply- I am just rather busy this weekend and will try to reply early next week sometime- and you are welcome!

RT

[Exit40]

Hi RT. That works fine for me. Thanks.

God Bless You

David

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Hi David,

As it turns out I have a bit of time so I will try to answer your request as best I can in brief. The Jubilee and the omer count do have in common the count of seven Sabbaths. The Omer count is related to the weekly Sabbaths while the Jubilee is related to land Sabbaths. Seven of each are counted the omer count ends with the Pentecost on the day after the Seventh weekly Sabbath or the 50th day after the Barley wave offering was brought into the temple on the day following the Sabbath that occurred during the feast of unleavened bread. The Jews today claim that this day occurs on the first day of Unleavened bread- or the day following the Passover because it was celebrated as a Sabbath rest, but that is not what scripture teaches, scripture clearly teaches that it was the day following the weekly Sabbath and not the Sabbath rest of the feast that was when the barley wave offering was brought into the temple.

Now as for the Jubilee, it also was a count of seven Sabbaths of seven years or 49 years in all, like the Omer count the Jubilee would begin at the start of the fiftieth year, thus except for the very first Jubilee, every Jubilee afterward would occur every 49 years. Israel was commanded to begin the count of Sabbath years when they entered the Land after wandering in the wilderness. So that first year would have been a Sabbath for the land. I am uncertain whether the turn of the year would have been considered the start of that Jubilee which always began in the fall after harvest at Tabernacles, or if they would have counted the year that they entered the Sabbath since they crossed the Jordan in the spring just before the Passover in this case the Sabbath year would have ended that fall rather than starting then.

Now according to scripture Israel never successfully celebrated a Jubilee, the closest they came is found here:

2 Kings 19:29-31
29 ‘Then this shall be the sign for you: you will eat this year what grows of itself, in the second year what springs from the same, and in the third year sow, reap, plant vineyards, and eat their fruit.
30 ‘The surviving remnant of the house of Judah will again take root downward and bear fruit upward.
31 ‘For out of Jerusalem will go forth a remnant, and out of Mount Zion survivors. The zeal of the Lord will perform this.

This may be the only evidence in all of scripture that a Jubilee was celebrated, In Jeremiah 34:8 we see King Zedekiah unsuccessfully celebrate a Jubilee. He failed to allow the servants to return in the year of release, or Jubilee. Throughout the years of the kings there was never a good king that reigned long enough for a Jubilee to be successfully carried out. I do not know however if there was a Jubilee carried out after captivity. Scripture gives us no record of one, and up until the time of Christ I do not know if the Jews ever did celebrate one.

How the omer count and Jubilee cycles might be related prophetically I do not know. perhaps the omer count relates somehow to church age, and the fullness of the gentiles???

It also does appear that from the language used to describe the restoration of Israel that prophetically speaking a Jubilee will be fulfilled when Christ returns to earth and the Millennial reign begins.

One word of caution when studying the feasts, if you should embark upon it that is, you must know from the start that the current Jewish view concerning the contemporary celebrations of the feasts bares little resemblance to the scriptural mandates. Indeed even during Christ's day the way they were celebrated was disputed, the Sadducees followed a more literal interpretation while the Pharisees followed the oral law. Christ would Himself have followed a literal interpretation, since the oral law and its traditions were corrupted by men. It makes the study of the feasts a bit confusing especially when you try to do research and compare commentaries. It seems that so many read the current practice as well as the corrupted NT practices into them; so just a heads up there. I am convinced that there was some kind of conspiracy of the rabbinical authors who codified the oral traditions in order to cover up Jesus' true identity. This is one reason why I do not trust that the Sabbath years as they are currently reckoned are accurate. Ultimately it will all be sorted out by the Lord, His timing is always accurate.

Hope this helps

RT

[Exit40]

One word of caution when studying the feasts, if you should embark upon it that is, you must know from the start that the current Jewish view concerning the contemporary celebrations of the feasts bares little resemblance to the scriptural mandates. Indeed even during Christ's day the way they were celebrated was disputed, the Sadducees followed a more literal interpretation while the Pharisees followed the oral law. Christ would Himself have followed a literal interpretation, since the oral law and its traditions were corrupted by men. It makes the study of the feasts a bit confusing especially when you try to do research and compare commentaries. It seems that so many read the current practice as well as the corrupted NT practices into them; so just a heads up there. I am convinced that there was some kind of conspiracy of the rabbinical authors who codified the oral traditions in order to cover up Jesus' true identity. This is one reason why I do not trust that the Sabbath years as they are currently reckoned are accurate. Ultimately it will all be sorted out by the Lord, His timing is always accurate.

Hope this helps

RT

Tell me about it. I agree there is much confusion out there about the true meanings of these feasts. I am as lost as ever after some research and find myself chasing little bits of information for relevance. You seem to have a pretty good grip on this, and make more sense than just about anything I have read so far, but I have only looked at this from the Hebrew perspective. One thing that stood out for me was the purchase of the first born male. I don't understand it yet, but I feel it may have something to do with the 144,000 who are redeemed from the earth. I haven't made a connection yet, seems to be a bit of a mystery for me at this point. Any thoughts on this ?

God Bless You

David

[Resurrection Torchlight]

David perhaps you might want to start a new thread concerning the first born males and the feasts, so as not to hijack this thread.

RT

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Now back to the topic- (sort of)
MarkT wrote:

The parable of the fish reflects a later time (after the Millennium) when the wicked dead are resurrected and have their Judgment Day.

The parable shows that both good and bad fish are gathered in the nets together (like the tares and wheat are harvested together). When the net was filled with both good and bad fish of every kind (just as the field is ripe and ready for harvest with both wheat and tares) then it is pulled up out of the sea and onto the beach where the fish are separated, ( again sheep and goats) the good from the bad, the good fish are gathered into containers (like the wheat is gathered into the Lord's barn)in order to be kept or saved, the bad fish are thrown away into the furnace of fire (like the tares) they are discarded . In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. It is the same idea reflected in the tares parable but using a different word picture. I do agree that both reflect a post millennium event.

Matthew 13:47-50
47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet cast into the sea, and gathering fish of every kind;
48 and when it was filled, they drew it up on the beach; and they sat down and gathered the good fish into containers, but the bad they threw away.
49 “So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous,
50 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

The tares and the bad fish have the same exact end in store:

Matthew 13:42
42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

These two parables are describing the same event, not two different events.

RT

[MarkT]

I disagree.

There are two resurrections to Heaven presented in the Bible.
- The first is only for the Living, that is the spriitually righteous that God selects. (He is not the God of the dead, but of the living Jesus said.)
- The second is for both Living and Dead.

The Dead are only resurrected from Hades (sheol) at the end of the Millennium.
The second parable includes the dead being caught up...
It thus reflects conditions at the end of the Millennium.

[Resurrection Torchlight]

There are two resurrections to Heaven presented in the Bible.
- The first is only for the Living, that is the spriitually righteous that God selects. (He is not the God of the dead, but of the living Jesus said.)
- The second is for both Living and Dead.

Hi Mark,
I agree with you that there are two resurrections spoken of in scripture, that is two kinds of resurrection one to life and one to judgment however the passage that speaks of the order of the resurrection indicates that there is a definite order and in that order are at least two resurrections to life- The Christ first fruits (AKA the body of Christ or the church) and those that are His at His coming (the tribulation saints) this is supported by the Revelation, those in chapter 7 who appear standing before the throne waving palm branches, and then those in Chapter 15 who are shown again in chapter 20 who are described as those who did not take the mark of the beast, who die as martyrs during the tribulation, these are the tribulation saints.

1 Corinthians 15:22-24
22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming,
24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.

I also believe that a third resurrection to life will occur at the end of the millennium, "then comes the end", this is also supported in the Revelation when the sea gives up its dead. I explained all of this earlier here as well as in other threads.

The Dead are only resurrected from Hades (sheol) at the end of the Millennium.

Yes I would agree that there is only one resurrection to judgment, for the spiritually dead who are resurrected from Hades and that it follows the Millennium, as supported in the Revelation, death and Hades give up their dead.

The second parable includes the dead being caught up...
It thus reflects conditions at the end of the Millennium.

In the first parable the wheat and tares are reaped together
in the second parable the good fish and bad fish are caught in the net together

in the first parable the tares are collected out from among the wheat by the angels and bundled and burned in the furnace of fire
in the second parable the bad fish are collected out from among the good by the angels and thrown into the furnace of fire

in the first parable the wheat is gathered into the Lord's barn by the angels
in the second parable the good fish are gathered into containers by the angels

in the first parable we are told that this is what takes place at the end of the age
in the second parable we are told that this is what takes place at the end of the age

I do not understand how you can ascribe different meanings to these parables when it is obvious that they are speaking concerning the same event. Please explain how you arrive at your conclusions, in what way exactly are the two parables showing two different events? If I understand you correctly you are saying that the dead are caught up in the parable of the fish but not in the parable of the tares??? Just because the word "caught" is used doesn't mean that the tares are not also gathered up, clearly the tares are collected or gathered along with the wheat, just as the bad fish are gathered together in the net with the good fish. The first parable shows a ripened harvest in a field- the field is full of grain (and tares), the other shows a net full of fish both bad and good. Both the field and the net are on the earth, the field on the ground the net in the sea. The field is reaped, and the net is drawn up onto shore. The grain is cut off from its source of life, the fish are cut off from their source of life. The tares are collected out of the wheat to be carried off and burned, the same with the bad fish. How do you explain the fate of the tares if only the wheat are gathered up?? I am at a loss as to how anyone could understand these two parables as being two different events- perhaps you can help me see your position more clearly??

The point of both parables is this- You have the righteous and unrighteous co-existing together until the "end of the age" ("then comes the end" in the passage concerning the order of the resurrection) when they are all gathered together and separated from one another, the unrighteous are collected out from among the righteous and are cast into the lake of fire, while the righteous are gathered in order to keep and preserve them- one is destroyed the other is saved. Both speak of the same event that occurs at the end of the Millennium,this is depicted for us in the Revelation at the white throne judgment. As you pointed out there is only one place where we see the wicked receive their eternal condemnation and that is after the millennium, since both parables speak about the wicked being burned in the furnace of fire to receive their eternal judgment- before the righteous are gathered together, and we know that this judgment only occurs at the end of the millennium, then both of these parables must be speaking concerning this same event that involves the judgment of the wicked.

In Matthew 13 you also have the parable about the treasure hidden in the field and the parable of the costly pearl, these two parables use two different word pictures to say the same thing. The Lord did this to make His point clear to all kinds of people; farmers, fisherman, merchants, landowners in terms that they could understand.

RT

[MarkT]

No, the wheat and tares are not reaped together.

I have already posted a long enough explanation of this distinction; please read back a few posts or a page or two.

I do not agree there are three resurrections to Heaven; I don't know where you get that conclusion of yours.

Four times the Bible says there are two:

Dan 12:1; versus 12:2
John 5:24-5; versus 5:28-29
Mt 24:31; versus 25:31-46
Rev 6:12-7:17 and 20:4; versus 20:11-15

[Resurrection Torchlight]

MarkT

Matthew 13:30
30 ‘Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”

They are absolutely reaped together, you cannot possibly go throughout a field and reap only tares, the whole field is reaped and then the tares are gathered up/collected to be burned, but the wheat is gathered into the barn. No one who has a field of grain ready to harvest will go around and cut out all the individual weeds, when a field is harvested the whole thing is cut and the weeds are separated out later. In any case the tares are collected first and burned, in that place where there is gnashing of teeth- this is clearly their eternal condemnation in the lake of fire and therefore must come at the end of the Millennium- because that is the only place we see in scripture that the wicked are raised and judged. The wheat is gathered afterward- therefore their resurrection happens after the tares are raised. There is no other way to view this.

I get my idea regarding the resurrection from the word of God as I have described above

1 Corinthians 15:22-24
22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming,
24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.

The passages you list do speak of resurrection events, however scripture never actually states that there is only one resurrection for the righteous, though it does seem to show that there is only one for the wicked. What scripture says is that there are two kinds of resurrections- one to eternal life and one to judgment. Two classifications, not two as in ordinal value. The only place you see something that can be interpreted as such is in Rev 20, where the tribulation saints are raised and told that they are blessed because they have a part in the first resurrection, but does this have to mean it was the very first one or of the first kind? It is a fact that Jesus Himself has already been the first resurrected to life, there will also be the two witnesses who will be raised to life, that would be two resurrection events to life that will have occurred before Revelation 20's "first resurrection", how do you explain that?

I mean, in the context of the parable, if weeding out the tares by pulling them up would harm the wheat, wouldn't reaping them which does the same thing still harm the wheat when it is ready at the harvest?

Secondly, the tares, which are collected, or bundled, or in a spiritual sense, bound; are not burned at that time but will be burned - a future event.

Is this your explanation?? I could not find much more specifically relating to the tares and wheat other than the whole conversation regarding the difference between collecting and gathering. But to answer you- no, reaping the tares would not damage the wheat, because the wheat is done growing, it is ready to be harvested, to be harvested is to be reaped or cut down, so if both tares and wheat are cut together there is no harm to the wheat, all that needs to be done is for the tares to be collected out from among the harvested wheat. The parable gives no indication that the tares are burned at some future event, when the harvest is completed the tares are bundled and burned. Both parables are speaking about a reaping or catching in the net that occurs at the "end of the age".

It may be that you posted something somewhere in this thread that explains in more detail why you believe as you do,perhaps I am missing it, I wonder if you would mind copying and pasting it here for me.

Thank you in advance.

RT

[MarkT]

They are absolutely reaped together

Jesus doesn't say that as Matthew wrote it in the Greek. The tares are collected - doesn't mean uprooted, nor reaped, or even gathered like the wheat which IS removed from the field.

The tares could be bundled... the action is not delineated like you say.

The whole point I made correcting the common misconception of 16th century Christian readers is that the tares and the wheat are treated the same - which you want to maintain.

We disagree, and we're going to continue to disagree; get used to it.

[MarkT]

In any case the tares are collected first and burned, in that place where there is gnashing of teeth- this is clearly their eternal condemnation in the lake of fire and therefore must come at the end of the Millennium...

Anytime somebody tells me "this clearly shows," or "it is clear," or as you have done: I am pretty sure I'm not going to agree with whatever follows and this is yet another case.

It doesn't say the tares are burned in the place of the gnashing of teeth, nor does it say they are thrown into the Lake of Fire; the first Trumpet involves fire and that is one of three principle elements in action on the Day of the Lord Wrath in Scripture. Fire burns up a third of the earth. In Peter's observer-true point of view, where the fire hits, it's going to be really hot.

[Resurrection Torchlight]

in the explanation of the parable it does say that just like the tares the stumbling blocks are cast into the furnace of fire

Matthew 13:40-42
40 “So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age.
41 “The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness,
42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth

??????

RT

[Resurrection Torchlight]

seems pretty clear to me

RT

[MarkT]

The passages you list do speak of resurrection events, however scripture never actually states that there is only one resurrection for the righteous, though it does seem to show that there is only one for the wicked.

It never actually states that there is only one resurrection for the righteous?

That wasn't the point I was making, nor is that what Scripture says. I said the first resurrection is only for the righteous, the Living, the Elect.

The second resurrection includes both righteous and wicked; ergo, the separation between the two.

...as such is in Rev 20, where the tribulation saints are raised and told that they are blessed because they have a part in the first resurrection...

Scripture does not call them "tribulation saints." That is a Pre-Trib term which is made up so they don't have to be part of the Elect of Mt 24's Olivet Discourse by Jesus.

It is a fact that Jesus Himself has already been the first resurrected to life, there will also be the two witnesses who will be raised to life, that would be two resurrection events to life that will have occurred before Revelation 20's "first resurrection", how do you explain that?

The first resurrection is only pronounced in Rev 20:4 when the martyrs, previously told to wait until their number is complete, are made "alive." This is the first time when all those in the first resurrection are all together in the third Heaven of God the Father's presence.

The completed number of the martyrs includes the last two to be admitted: the Two Witnesses. So their being called up is not a "separate" resurrection from the overall resurrection of the Elect - which doesn't count Jesus' ascension 2000 years ago.

But to answer you- no, reaping the tares would not damage the wheat, because the wheat is done growing,

Jesus doesn't say the tares are reaped. I don't know how you "reap" weeds either...

The parable gives no indication that the tares are burned at some future event,
- when the harvest is completed the tares are bundled and burned.

Ah,... that would be an event in the future from their collection - and coming, as you so note, after the gathering Harvest which removes the wheat from the field.

The tares stay in the field.

[MarkT]

in the explanation of the parable it does say that just like the tares the stumbling blocks are cast into the furnace of fire

That's in the explanation.

In the parable, the tares are burned in the field of this world - on the Day of the Lord there is fire.

After the Millennium - the dead are resurrected - ALL the dead - and the wicked are thrown into the Lake of Fire.

They are not the same.

[MarkT]

seems pretty clear to me

There you go again.

Guess what, I disagree with you! LOL!

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Jesus doesn't say that as Matthew wrote it in the Greek. The tares are collected - doesn't mean uprooted, nor reaped, or even gathered like the wheat which IS removed from the field.

The tares could be bundled... the action is not delineated like you say.

The whole point I made correcting the common misconception of 16th century Christian readers is that the tares and the wheat are treated the same - which you want to maintain.

Isn't that the point the parable is making?

Matthew 13:30
30 ‘Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”

They grow together side by side in the same field, they are both undisturbed, receive the same rain stand in the same soil. They aren't treated differently until after they are reaped. The Lord says to the reapers- who are reaping, "collect the tares first" then bind them, not bind them in order to put them away for another day, but bind them TO BURN THEM UP. That is the purpose for their collection and binding in bundles- so that they can be burned.

How can the tares be collected unless they are reaped first? Are they collected while they still have roots in the ground? How is it possible to collect them if they are still growing in the field? What does it mean that they are collected? The wheat is removed but the tares are left intact? Is that your claim?

RT

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Okay- I think I see your point now, yeah we will just have to agree to disagree brother, but it's all okay
Kind of fun doing this in real time.

RT

[MarkT]

Okay, that is why I went to the Greek to explain the different verbs being used - to say that the action was not the same for both in the field. There is a differentiation in how they are treated from the get-go; how, however, is not totally explained here: it's just a parable.

[watching]

Hi RT,

Are you maintaining that the harvest doesn't occur until the end of the millennium?

Just asking.

[Resurrection Torchlight]

Are you maintaining that the harvest doesn't occur until the end of the millennium?

Yes I am maintaining that this particular harvest- which the parable says is the wheat harvest, occurs at the end of the Millennium- hence the "end of the age".

I see three separate harvests as occurring which represent separate crops or soul harvests AKA resurrection events

Barley first fruits- those who make up the body of Christ- the church
Wheat first fruits- those who are saved during the tribulation
The general wheat harvest- those who make up the righteous mortals who live during the millennium.

Each of these harvests has a corresponding feast according to the law of Moses:

Unleavened Bread
Pentecost
Tabernacles

(It may be that the Barley firstfruits- is Christ, while the general Barley harvest is His body, in that case it would occur between the time of barley first fruits and end at or around Pentecost)

That is my take on it all

RT

[watching]

Hi RT,

Thanks for your reply.

That is my take on it all

I'm glad you realize that this is all just speculation, but I have been considering the Feasts of the Lord, as well, and I do not know all the answers anymore than anyone else......

But, I was wondering, if Christ was the First Fruit of the Barley Harvest......

And if the Giving of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost is the First Fruit of the Kingdom of God, as well as, the 3,000 saved, and the birth of the Church, as well, represent the First Fruit of the Wheat Harvest.....

Then how can there be any more "first fruit" of the Barley Harvest or the Wheat Harvest?

I mean, how can you have a second "first" fruit?

I don't mean to sound condescending in any way, because I have considered the possibilities of First Fruits and Pentecost, before, myself, as well.

But, at this point, it would seem to me that the First Fruit of the Barley Harvest and the First Fruit of the Wheat Harvest have already been taken.

Wouldn't it seem that way to you?

Nevertheless, James 1:18 says that we are a kind of first fruit, but it doesn't say what kind.

James 1:18

King James Version (KJV)

18Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

[watching]

Also, here is my take on the wheat harvest.

I think the key phrase is "to burn them."

Matthew 13:30

King James Version (KJV)

30Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

As I said before, I think Jesus gave the logical sequence of events, based on the situation that was being described in each parable.

Whether there is any more to it than that, I really don't know.

But, thinking about it logically, here is what I think I would do if I were a wheat farmer and it was time for harvest.

First of all, I think it would make more sense to pull out the tares by the roots first, before reaping the wheat.

Because, think about, if the tares stand up straight in the field and are easy to spot because the wheat bows when it is ripe, then wouldn't it be much easier to just pull out the tares, at that point?

However, If you were to sickle the wheat and the tares together, at the same time, then when they are both laid flat, you wouldn't be able to tell which are the wheat and which are the tares as easily, would you?

Besides, the scripture already tells us that the tares are pulled out by the roots:

Matthew 13:29

King James Version (KJV)

29But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

Then after pulling the tares out, if it is now harvest time, what would be the next priority?

I don't think it would be to immediately burn the tares.

If it were harvest time, and I were the farmer, I think my next step would be to reap the wheat before it gets over-ripe or damaged somehow.

So, if it were me, I would probably just lay the bundles of tares aside somewhere, until I got the wheat completely ready, which would require separating the wheat from the chaff, etc., and then placing the grain in bags, etc.

I don't think I would be worried about the tares at that point, at all. In fact, burning the tares would be my last priority.

It probably wouldn't be until I had completely finished with the wheat harvest, that I would even think about the tares again.

But, as I said, I'm not a wheat farmer, so I don't really know what the process is.

Nevertheless, that's how I would do it, if it were me.

[watching]

One more thing that I would like to point out is that there doesn't seem to be a distinction in scripture between the wheat harvest and the barley harvest, from what I can tell.

Apparently, the word σῖτος, although it primarily refers to wheat, can also refer to barley, as well.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dsi%3Dtos

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4621&t=KJV

Also if you will notice in Leviticus, a sheaf of the first fruits of the Harvest is presented on "First Fruits."

Leviticus 23:10-14

King James Version (KJV)

10Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest:

11And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.

12And ye shall offer that day when ye wave the sheaf an he lamb without blemish of the first year for a burnt offering unto the LORD.

13And the meat offering thereof shall be two tenth deals of fine flour mingled with oil, an offering made by fire unto the LORD for a sweet savour: and the drink offering thereof shall be of wine, the fourth part of an hin.

14And ye shall eat neither bread, nor parched corn, nor green ears, until the selfsame day that ye have brought an offering unto your God: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

However on Pentecost there is no sheaf which is presented, but rather two wave loaves baked with leaven.

Leviticus 23:15-21

King James Version (KJV)

15And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:

16Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

17Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals; they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD.

18And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

19Then ye shall sacrifice one kid of the goats for a sin offering, and two lambs of the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings.

20And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering before the LORD, with the two lambs: they shall be holy to the LORD for the priest.

21And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.

So, it doesn't seem, to me that there is a separate harvest on Pentecost, but rather a first fruits of the bread that is baked with the first fruits of the the grain harvest, (be it barley or wheat).

Also, this is just my opinion, but it doesn't seem to me that the leaven in this case represents sin.

It seems more likely, to me, that the leaven in this case, must represent the following:

Luke 13:18-21

King James Version (KJV)

18Then said he, Unto what is the kingdom of God like? and whereunto shall I resemble it?

19It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and cast into his garden; and it grew, and waxed a great tree; and the fowls of the air lodged in the branches of it.

20And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God?

21It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

It's also important to note that when the harvest is reaped there is not to be a clean riddance of the corners.

Leviticus 23:22

King James Version (KJV)

22And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.

So, the corners are not reaped with the rest of the harvest, but are left for the poor.

I wonder what the corners might represent.

hmmmm

(I think I have an idea.)

[Resurrection Torchlight]

watching,

you make a lot of points, I will try to answer what I can in brief as it is late.

But first of all this parable was given in ancient times so you have to think like an ancient farmer. Think of a very large field full of grain. now think of having to try to sort through all the standing grain to pick out the tares and pluck them up. Have you ever actually seen a field of wheat? It would be a difficult task to make sure all the weeds were pulled out before the reaping began whether or not the tares stood up straight, from what I have read tares are shorter than wheat, so likely at a glance you could never pick them out just by looking, you would have to examine every row carefully, which would be very time consuming and labor intensive, to pluck each one out individually, not to mention you might still upset the wheat and have some of it lying on the ground to be stepped on by others and to spoil before you got around to reaping. It would be much easier to sort them out afterward.From my understanding the seeds are very different in size and would be easy to sort on the threshing floor. It really is a moot point anyway, because the angels who are called "reapers" are there to "reap" and they have the supernatural ability to distinguish the tare from the wheat, they are no ordinary farmers.

Secondly at Pentecost it is true that the wave offering was of baked loaves. But the First Fruits of the wheat harvest were cut by the priests and brought into the temple where they were processed and finely ground into flour to bake the bread. The Barley first fruits were cut and processed the same way but only the the flour was offered and not loaves. A sheaf is a measure of weight like a bushel.

Next- there are only three uses of the word "barley" in the New Testament, twice it is the Greek word "κρίθινος' [krithinos] which means made of barley. In Rev 6:6 you have both wheat and barley used in the same passage- wheat is "σιτίον, σῖτος" [sitos] meaning wheat or grain, while barley is "κριθή" [krithe] meaning barley. So there is a distinction made here in scripture.

Revelation 6:6
6 And I heard something like a voice in the center of the four living creatures saying, “A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius; and do not damage the oil and the wine.”

The word used for wheat in the tares parable is the same word used in the Revelation for wheat -"sitos".

There most certainly were two harvests and two separate first fruits. The Barley first fruits wave offering occurred during the feast of unleavened bread. This is when the barley harvest started it is the first grain to ripen in the spring after the winter. There would be no wheat to offer at that time of year because as a matter of fact it is not ripe yet. Wheat ripens later, it was the first fruits of the wheat harvest that were used to bake the loaves for the first fruits wave offering of the feast of weeks or Pentecost which is also called the feast of first fruits and the feast of the harvest. Other first fruits were also brought to the temple at this time- grapes, new wine, pomegranates, figs etc... The loaves offered at Pentecost where made of the first fruits of the wheat harvest not barley, because the barley harvest would be ending at that time.

My whole point about the parable is this- you have tares being gathered, whether they are reaped with the wheat or not is insignificant. The point is we are told that this happens at "the end of the age", that angels collect the stumbling blocks or "tares" out from among the righteous and they are burned in the furnace of fire where there is gnashing of teeth. Now we know from the revelation when this happens, it happens at the end of the millennial reign- after the 1000 years. The dead who are raised from Hades and judged are cast into the lake of fire, the parable puts this event before the "wheat" is gathered into the Lord's barn.

“First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”

Matthew 13:43
43 “Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

So if the tares are collected first and thrown into the fire and then the righteous are gathered into the Lord's barn, this would seem to contradict the popular interpretation of what this passage is speaking of. Whatever view you have concerning the resurrection pre- mid-wrath-post, this parable indicates that there is a resurrection of the righteous that follows the millennial reign. Which kind of throws a wrench into the popular ideas concerning the belief in only one resurrection for the righteous. Clearly the lawless ones are receiving the eternal "reward", their judgment, they are being thrown into the furnace of fire- this is beyond dispute. The righteous then who are gathered into the Lord's barn are also receiving their eternal reward- they are glorified in their resurrection to life, which follows the judgment of the wicked. So therefore must also occur after the millennial reign.

That is the point I am making. That there is more than one resurrection of the righteous.

Which I believe is supported by the passage in 1 Corinthians 15 concerning the order of the resurrection, as well as the idea that there are three harvest festivals which may correspond to the same three harvests of souls that appear in the order of the resurrection passage. Barley (first fruits), wheat first fruits and the in-gathering of the wheat harvest.

RT

[Resurrection Torchlight]

http://www.antipas.org/books/tares/tares.html

Tares

"This plant is the bearded darnel or rye grass, and resembles wheat so closely that it can prosper in the fields and be almost indistinguishable until fully grown. It flourishes in quantities in countries along the Mediterranean Sea. To the farmer it is one of the most destructive of all weeds, and in Eastern countries women and children are employed to pick out these tares before they can ruin the good crop. As soon as the ears are formed, it is possible to recognize them, but both the wheat and the tares are usually left intermixed until after reaping. Then they are separated by a fanning that blows away the lighter and smaller seeds of the tares, and after threshing, all seeds are shaken in a sieve. Thus any darnel seeds still remaining will usually pass through and leave the larger wheat behind. The inner coats of these seeds often harbor seriously poisonous fungus growths that, if eaten by humans or animals, will cause dizziness and vomiting and sometimes even death. Virgil calls it the infelix lolium, and the Arabs siwan. - (All The Plants Of The Bible, Winifred Walker Doubleday & Company, 1979)"

[Resurrection Torchlight]

http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/tares.html

Holman's Bible Dictionary defines TARES as follows:

"TARES KJV term for grassy weeds resembling wheat, generally identified as darnel (genus Lolium)"

It is pretty much accepted today that the tares Jesus spoke of are darnel of the genus Lolium. Cephalaria syriaca is also a possibility mentioned by some researchers, but based on archeological studies, its evident lack in Biblical times would seem to indicate it is not the tare of the Bible. Secular dictionaries also define the tare as most likely being darnel:

"Darnel is a weed grass (probably bearded darnel or Lolium temulentum) that looks very much like wheat until it is mature, when the seeds reveal a great difference. Darnel seeds aren't good for much except as chicken feed or to burn to prevent the spread of this weed" (World English Dictionary).

Easton's Bible Dictionary describes "tares" as follows:

"the bearded darnel, mentioned only in Matt. 13:25-30. It is the Lolium temulentum, a species of rye-grass, the seeds of which are a strong soporific poison. It bears the closest resemblance to wheat till the ear appears, and only then the difference is discovered. It grows plentifully in Syria and Palestine."

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition 2000 defines "soporific: as:

ADJECTIVE: 1. Inducing or tending to induce sleep. 2. Drowsy.
NOUN: A drug or other substance that induces sleep; a hypnotic.

Smith's Bible Dictionary offers these comments on the "tares":

"There can be little doubt that the zizania of the parable, #Mt 13:25 denotes the weed called "darnel" (Lolium temulentum). . . . The grains of the L. temulentum, if eaten, produce convulsions, and even death."

A very interesting note I found on Botanical.com concerning darnel was this:

"The admixture of the grain with those of the nutritious cereals amongst which it is often found growing should be guarded against, as its properties are generally regarded as deleterious. Gerard tells us: 'the new bread wherein Darnel is eaten hot causeth drunkenness.' When Darnel has been given medicinally in a harmful quantity, it is recorded to have produced all the symptoms of drunkenness: a general trembling, followed by inability to walk, hindered speech and vomiting. For this reason the French call Darnel: 'Ivraie,' from Ivre (drunkenness); the word Darnel is itself of French origin and testifies to its intoxicating qualities, being derived from an old French word Darne, signifying stupefied. The ancients supposed it to cause blindness, hence with the Romans, lolio victitare, to live on Darnel, was a phrase applied to a dim-sighted person.

"The alleged poisonous properties of Darnel are now generally believed to be due to a fungus" (http://www.botanical.com/botanical/mgmh ... 4.html#dar).

Interesting also is the fact that farmers in the modern wheatbelt of America have to take measures to control the effects of tares (in this case, lolium rigidum) on their cattle due to bacteria (ARGT, Annual Ryegrass Toxicity). In a 30 year study, 250,000 sheep and 600 cattle died because of ARGT, not to mention the effects of intoxification on a score of others. (See
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:Qc ... n&ie=UTF-8).

Recapping the symptoms in the various definitions above concerning darnel and/or its fungus, they are:

1. Sleepiness, drowsiness
2. Hypnotic episodes
3. Convulsions
4. Drunkenness, intoxication
5. Trembling
6. Inability to walk
7. Hindered speech
8. Vomiting
9. Stupification
10. Dim-sightedness

Other sites I visited include giddiness, apathy and various abnormal sensations as effects of darnel.

In the early days of "the move of God," we saw all of these things and they are still happening today. Not only is there darnel in the Church, the darnel has apparently been affected by fungus. Not only that, but one must wonder how many cases of spiritual blindness and death have occurred.

Some say darnel in itself is not harmful, often being used for hay for livestock. They say that it's when the parasite fungus takes up residence within the seed head that it becomes deadly in the physical realm. But, in Jesus' parable, the analogy does not hold water. Spiritually, darnel has the destiny of being cast into the fire. Wheat is to be gathered into the barn. It may not appear that spiritual darnel is that dangerous, but when one looks at the end result, it is deadly:

30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

There is a time to distinguish between darnel and wheat. The fruit of the darnel is smaller than the fruit produced by true wheat. They say the difference is very distinguishable and obvious, and the difference in the sizes of the seeds makes separating them an easy task. There are those who have convulsed, been made drunk, trembled uncontrollably, stammered in their speech, were stupified, turned giddy, etc., who have tried to tell us that that was wheat. There are also those who have not fallen into such things, but have brought confusion into the Church with darnel such as the non-trinitarian doctrine, a watered-down gospel, and agendas that lead the Church off into corporate efforts God never sanctioned. Are these things wheat or darnel? Some are obviously darnel, while with others, it takes time to make the distinction. This I know for sure: the One who planted the good seed which bears fruit will come back to harvest His wheat, and not one grain of darnel will be found in the barn.

[watching]

Hi RT,

I stand corrected.

Thanks for all the information. It was very interesting.

I knew that there was a separate word for barley, however, the point that I was trying to make is that I thought, and maybe still do, that First Fruits, actually refers to the first ripe fruit of the harvest, (which just so happens to be barley), but the important thing is that it is the first ripe fruit (grain).

But you are correct, because there does appear to be a distinction between the first ripe fruit (which happens to be barley) and the wheat harvest, because I also noticed that in Exodus 34:22 it specifically refers to wheat.

Exodus 34:22

King James Version (KJV)

22And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.

Prior to your explanation, and prior to seeing the above verse, I was thinking that maybe the bread that was baked on Pentecost (Shavuot) was baked using the first fruits of the grain harvest, not necessarily the wheat harvest, since there is no sheaf that is mentioned as being cut and presented. But obviously, I was wrong.

So, you are right, apparently the bread that is presented on Shavuot is made from the first fruits of the wheat harvest.

However, I still think its interesting that there is no sheaf that is presented on Pentecost/Shavuot, but rather two loaves of bread baked with leaven.

So, it appears to me that the emphasis is on the leaven.

This also seems to correspond with what occurred on Pentecost, since there was no resurrection or anything of that nature.

Whereas on First Fruits, Christ was resurrected from the dead and became the first fruits of them that slept.

(Actually, Christ is the first to be raised to eternal life, not just raised from the dead, because others had been raised from the dead prior to that, such as Lazarus).

1 Corinthians 15:20

King James Version (KJV)

20But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

Also, if you will notice in Leviticus 23, in connection with First Fruits, it speaks of reaping the harvest.

Leviticus 23:10

King James Version (KJV)

10Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest:

However, there is no mention of reaping of the harvest on Pentecost.

Leviticus 23:15-21

King James Version (KJV)

15And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:

16Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

17Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals; they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD.

18And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

19Then ye shall sacrifice one kid of the goats for a sin offering, and two lambs of the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings.

20And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering before the LORD, with the two lambs: they shall be holy to the LORD for the priest.

21And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.

That's why I think Pentecost refers to the first fruits of the Kingdom of God (not necessarily the first fruit of the reaping of the wheat harvest, but just the first fruit of the wheat harvest), because there doesn't seem to be any reaping mentioned in connection to the feast of weeks.

Although it does mention reaping in Verse 22. However, this seems to refer to the reaping of the harvest in general.

Leviticus 23:22

King James Version (KJV)

22And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.

Here is Leviticus 23 in it's entirety:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus%2023&version=KJV

Does what I said make any sense?

What do you think?

[watching]

One more thing that I would like to point out is that although "sitos" or "sitari" refers specifically to wheat and "krithe" or "krithari" specifically refers to barley.

The word sitos (sitira is a form of the word sitos) can also refer to grain in general.

wheat = σιτάρι
sitari

barley = κριθάρι
krithari

grain = σιτηρά
sitira

See Greek-English lexicon:

http://www.kypros.org/cgi-bin/lexicon

[MarkT]

My whole point about the parable is this- you have tares being gathered, whether they are reaped with the wheat or not is insignificant.

Again, we disagree. The Greek doesn't say the tares are gathered like the wheat is... the tares are collected - it is a different action as differentiated in the Bible. It's amazing that you refuse to make this distinction after so many attempts to sharpen your teaching.

The point is we are told that this happens at "the end of the age", that angels collect the stumbling blocks or "tares" out from among the righteous and they are burned in the furnace of fire where there is gnashing of teeth.

What a minute, first they are burned in the field... that is why they are collected.
The tares don't make it out of the field.
The wheat is taken to the barn; the barn is not in the field.
Furthermore: Which age? The Church Age? The Age of Man's Rule? Or the Millennium? You picked one arbitrarily.

The wheat follows the pattern of the wedding where the bride goes back with the groom to his father's house.
The wheat is taken to the barn.
This happens on the Day of the Lord as identified by Jesus in both the Olivet Discourse and the sixth Seal.
The wheat is gathered up in the Harvest on Rosh ha-Shanah with the pattern of the Festivals (appointments) as a guide.

The tares are burned in the field.
The field is identified as the world as the first explanation of the parable, v 38.
This is identified as the end of the age, v 40, which begs the question, which age?
Subsequent to that - after - in v 41, they are thrown into the Lake of Fire, v 41.

Verse 41 cannot be verse 38.
Do we have an error in the Bible? No.
The tares first are subject to an earthly, physical destruction beginning on the Day of the Lord -
- and subsequent to that, as you say, they are thrown into the Lake of Fire after the Sheep/Goat, Bema Seat Judgment.

So if the tares are collected first and thrown into the fire and then the righteous are gathered into the Lord's barn, this would seem to contradict the popular interpretation of what this passage is speaking of.

Yep. And I would put the sequence-of-events as:

• The tares are collected.
• The wheat is harvested.
• The tares are burned in the field of this world.

That pattern follows the chronology of the Seal/Scroll where the Great Multitude show up in Heaven -out of the Great Tribulation- after the sun/moon/star event, and then, after the breaking of the seventh Seal, allowing the Scroll to finally be opened (that was the point of finding the only person who could break the Seals in the first place - Jesus) and the first thing to go forth in God's Wrath (which has been decreed from long ago - Dan 9:26, and so needs to be stored until the time is "ripe") is fire and blood with the first Trumpet Judgment.

In the pattern of the wedding ceremony, the bride is taken out of her father's house and meets the groom with his friends (carrying torches and with trumpet blasts of celebration) out in the street. They then go back to the HIS father's house (the barn) where the wedding is completed and the marriage consummated with the unveiling (we each will have to give an account of our lives).

Whatever view you have concerning the resurrection pre- mid-wrath-post, this parable indicates that there is a resurrection of the righteous that follows the millennial reign.

No, the only ones taken up initially are the righteous. The first resurrection in the four times both resurrections mentioned in the Bible is only for the righteous or Living.

Subsequent to the first Resurrection is the second. At that time, all the dead (there are no living people left, the universe will be destroyed at the end of the Millennium) will be collected and they will be separated as the second parable of the fish indicate. It is only at this time that the wicked are thrown into the Lake of Fire.

Which kind of throws a wrench into the popular ideas concerning the belief in only one resurrection for the righteous.

That "popular idea" as you call it is in Daniel 12:1; John 5:24-25; Mt 24:31 and Revelations sixth Seal and subsequent to that when the fifth Seal's number is complete with the coming up of the Two Witnesses in Rev 20:4. When all the Elect are assembled in Heaven now made 'alive' - only then does John say 'this is the first resurrection.'

Clearly the lawless ones are receiving the eternal "reward", their judgment, they are being thrown into the furnace of fire- this is beyond dispute.

There's that word "clearly" again - and you are ignoring verse 38 which says they are first burned in the field of this world.

That is the point I am making. That there is more than one resurrection of the righteous.

There are righteous people collected in the second resurrection: those who lived godly lives during the Millennium. The Millennium exists so that all of Israel will be saved. Indeed, they have the only resurrection from the grave to life on earth, and some who lived before will live again! (Ezekiel 9 and 44).

But I think you are splitting hairs between the barley offering (Jesus), the Firstfruits (144,000), the Harvest of the Elect, and the final coming up of the Two Witnesses that completes the number under the fifth Seal.

• Jesus rose and took captives in His train (Ps 68:18). These "men wondered at" in Zec 3 have been in Heaven since His return to the Father as Jesus said to Mary in the garden. I think they are the Elders John sees at the end of the age in Rev chapters 4-11.
  
  
• The first Resurrection -to the barn of Heaven- includes the Firstfruits, the Harvest of the Elect (deceased OT & NT Saints and those persecuted Christians who are still alive and are left at the time of the end - 1Th 4) and the martyrs - in that order.
  
  At the beginning of the Millennium, there is a resurrection to earth for Israel, so that all of Israel (who had a remnant hidden by God during the one 'seven,') will be saved. (Ez 9)
• At the end of the Millennium, there is a general rebellion (seventh head of the beast at work for a short time) against the camp of God at Jerusalem and this time there is total destruction and no one is left - no remnant, no ark, nothing! The earth and sky are burned up (opposite the science which has no heat in the end).
  
  It is at this time that the second Resurrection of Living and Dead (righteous and wicked) are called up from their graves. (No one is alive on the earth at all.) Then, the final accounting of souls will take place.
  
  
  - The Sheep (those of Israel who lived godly lives during the Millennim) will be separated from the Goats (the wicked from all ages from Cain to the tares of today, and even to the rebellious children at the end of the Millennium) and the former will pass into Heaven, while the latter are thrown into the Lake of Fire.
  - Those of Israel will be judged by the Apostles, who have already given an account of themselves and have ruled as Priests for a thousand years.

[MarkT]

Holman's Bible Dictionary defines TARES as follows:

"TARES KJV term for grassy weeds resembling wheat, generally identified as darnel (genus Lolium)"

That was actually quite good information.

Thank-you.